Censure Rockefeller – for starters

Thomas J. Dodd of Connecticut was the last United States Senator to be censured by his colleagues. He was so reprimanded in 1967 for using his office to transfer campaign funds for personal use. One would think that a Senator giving an enemy of the United States a warning of possible imminent danger to that enemy's ally would at least warrant the same mark as campaign fund embezzlement.

As Bill Bennett has pointed out in his much—noted article on National Review Online, Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia admits that well over a year before the commencement of military operations against Iraq, he traveled to various nations in the Middle East — including Syria, an ally of Saddam Hussein and identified rogue state and enemy of the United States — and gave them a heads—up that war was coming to Iraq and coming soon.

Sen. Rockefeller claims now that he was just passing along his learned opinion on the matter. Yet this excuse is no excuse at all — it is an admission of treason and it should be dealt with accordingly by the federal body who can immediately do the most about it; the United States Senate.

Despite what they often think, Senators are not a high priesthood elected to pass judgment on hypothetical or potential policies of the executive in front of foreign officials of any ilk. Senators do not represent any administration in any way. There is no telling what impact Sen. Rockefeller's words had on the Syrian government, who heard a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in essence announce a plan of going to war against an ally of Syria, well ahead of the first air strike. If a high—ranking official in the Iranian government traveled to the United States to tell this government of his nation's intention to launch weapons against Israel, do you think we might tell the Israelis about it and come up with a joint strategy or two?

Mr. Bennett calls for an investigation into what exactly Sen. Rockefeller said and to whom he said it on this Middle East trip of 2002. That is well and good, and there should definitely be an inquiry into this serious matter. But Mr. Bennett should not be a lone voice in this case. A prominent Republican member of the United States Senate — hell, any Republican member of the United States Senate — must stand up on the floor of the Senate and demand an investigation into Rockefeller's actions, and advocate his censure based on his own admission. This must happen immediately.

It is time for Republicans in the Senate to stand up and fight.

President George W. Bush has been fighting a lonely battle against the lies, fabrications and outright falsehoods posited by not only elements of traitorous groups within, but by almost every important elected Democrat member of Congress, who are increasingly beholden to the radical left fund—raising groups. All the while, as lie after lie after lie has been perpetrated, as Democrats like John Kerry, Edward Kennedy, Harry Reid, Charles Schumer and so many others have stood up and admitted that they were either duped by a moron, failed to perform due diligence in examining the evidence of Hussein's weapons capabilities — or both — the President has gone at it alone. It is left to him and his aides and the new media alone to rebut this cacophony of knaves and go about all of their other business. His supposed allies in Congress have decided to punt.

When Sen. Richard Durbin stood up in the Senate this past summer and compared the President of the United States to Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot, he got away clean with a non—apology apology and a public pat on the back from Sen. John McCain. This is the same Sen. McCain who now seems to parrot Sen. Durbin's incredible assertion that the United States military is hell—bent on brutally torturing captured enemies whose express purpose is the annihilation of the United States, Israel and all other infidels, and that there is a dire need for legislation to quell it. Yesterday, Sen. Bill Frist was the only Republican Senator on the floor arguing against the folly of setting a timetable for guaranteed United States withdrawal from Iraq.

The constant Democrat drumbeat of 'Bush lied' and the repetition of words and phrases such as 'deception,' 'false information,' 'quagmire,' and 'shame' all go against common sense and the march toward self—government in Iraq that is evident to anyone willing to go beyond the feckless American media (FOX News Channel included) and listen to people who are actually in Iraq. There have been many cases of citizens back home woefully unaware of defeats suffered by their forces at war overseas. But Iraq, even more than Vietnam before it, is an instance of mass media deluding its public into believing that victorious forces are suffering a defeat.

The willful media ignorance and underreporting of the criminal activities, neafrious ties and associations of figures such as George Galloway, the United Nations, Saddam Hussein, Abu Nidal, and al—Qaeda (to name a few) has fallen by the wayside, as has each opportunity to vigorously respond to the numerous outrages of the left. Now Rockefeller adds his name to this dishonorable roll.

Rocky spilled, U.S. soldiers killed?

Yet perception becomes reality, especially in a world when news is presented and consumed in snippets. For all of their dishonesty and lecherous behavior, the Democrats have succeeded in making the President appear as the liar to the casual observer, even though the criminal element is within their own Senate caucus. They have succeeded because those with the power and position to fight back have remained silent, not arguing the President's moral and legal right — and Constitutional obligation — to not only pursue those who would destroy us, but continue the policies of the previous administration and invade Iraq on January 20, 2001.

Democrats have succeeded because jelly—boned Republicans, more concerned about comity forever unrequited, opinion polls and general fence—jockeying are unwilling to stand up and fight for what is right and true, no matter the consequences.

This madness must end. Who among the members of the Republican Senate Caucus is man enough to stop it?

Thomas J. Dodd of Connecticut was the last United States Senator to be censured by his colleagues. He was so reprimanded in 1967 for using his office to transfer campaign funds for personal use. One would think that a Senator giving an enemy of the United States a warning of possible imminent danger to that enemy's ally would at least warrant the same mark as campaign fund embezzlement.

As Bill Bennett has pointed out in his much—noted article on National Review Online, Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia admits that well over a year before the commencement of military operations against Iraq, he traveled to various nations in the Middle East — including Syria, an ally of Saddam Hussein and identified rogue state and enemy of the United States — and gave them a heads—up that war was coming to Iraq and coming soon.

Sen. Rockefeller claims now that he was just passing along his learned opinion on the matter. Yet this excuse is no excuse at all — it is an admission of treason and it should be dealt with accordingly by the federal body who can immediately do the most about it; the United States Senate.

Despite what they often think, Senators are not a high priesthood elected to pass judgment on hypothetical or potential policies of the executive in front of foreign officials of any ilk. Senators do not represent any administration in any way. There is no telling what impact Sen. Rockefeller's words had on the Syrian government, who heard a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in essence announce a plan of going to war against an ally of Syria, well ahead of the first air strike. If a high—ranking official in the Iranian government traveled to the United States to tell this government of his nation's intention to launch weapons against Israel, do you think we might tell the Israelis about it and come up with a joint strategy or two?

Mr. Bennett calls for an investigation into what exactly Sen. Rockefeller said and to whom he said it on this Middle East trip of 2002. That is well and good, and there should definitely be an inquiry into this serious matter. But Mr. Bennett should not be a lone voice in this case. A prominent Republican member of the United States Senate — hell, any Republican member of the United States Senate — must stand up on the floor of the Senate and demand an investigation into Rockefeller's actions, and advocate his censure based on his own admission. This must happen immediately.

It is time for Republicans in the Senate to stand up and fight.

President George W. Bush has been fighting a lonely battle against the lies, fabrications and outright falsehoods posited by not only elements of traitorous groups within, but by almost every important elected Democrat member of Congress, who are increasingly beholden to the radical left fund—raising groups. All the while, as lie after lie after lie has been perpetrated, as Democrats like John Kerry, Edward Kennedy, Harry Reid, Charles Schumer and so many others have stood up and admitted that they were either duped by a moron, failed to perform due diligence in examining the evidence of Hussein's weapons capabilities — or both — the President has gone at it alone. It is left to him and his aides and the new media alone to rebut this cacophony of knaves and go about all of their other business. His supposed allies in Congress have decided to punt.

When Sen. Richard Durbin stood up in the Senate this past summer and compared the President of the United States to Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot, he got away clean with a non—apology apology and a public pat on the back from Sen. John McCain. This is the same Sen. McCain who now seems to parrot Sen. Durbin's incredible assertion that the United States military is hell—bent on brutally torturing captured enemies whose express purpose is the annihilation of the United States, Israel and all other infidels, and that there is a dire need for legislation to quell it. Yesterday, Sen. Bill Frist was the only Republican Senator on the floor arguing against the folly of setting a timetable for guaranteed United States withdrawal from Iraq.

The constant Democrat drumbeat of 'Bush lied' and the repetition of words and phrases such as 'deception,' 'false information,' 'quagmire,' and 'shame' all go against common sense and the march toward self—government in Iraq that is evident to anyone willing to go beyond the feckless American media (FOX News Channel included) and listen to people who are actually in Iraq. There have been many cases of citizens back home woefully unaware of defeats suffered by their forces at war overseas. But Iraq, even more than Vietnam before it, is an instance of mass media deluding its public into believing that victorious forces are suffering a defeat.

The willful media ignorance and underreporting of the criminal activities, neafrious ties and associations of figures such as George Galloway, the United Nations, Saddam Hussein, Abu Nidal, and al—Qaeda (to name a few) has fallen by the wayside, as has each opportunity to vigorously respond to the numerous outrages of the left. Now Rockefeller adds his name to this dishonorable roll.

Rocky spilled, U.S. soldiers killed?

Yet perception becomes reality, especially in a world when news is presented and consumed in snippets. For all of their dishonesty and lecherous behavior, the Democrats have succeeded in making the President appear as the liar to the casual observer, even though the criminal element is within their own Senate caucus. They have succeeded because those with the power and position to fight back have remained silent, not arguing the President's moral and legal right — and Constitutional obligation — to not only pursue those who would destroy us, but continue the policies of the previous administration and invade Iraq on January 20, 2001.

Democrats have succeeded because jelly—boned Republicans, more concerned about comity forever unrequited, opinion polls and general fence—jockeying are unwilling to stand up and fight for what is right and true, no matter the consequences.

This madness must end. Who among the members of the Republican Senate Caucus is man enough to stop it?